◆ SpookStack

HEREIN.15 UNCLASSIFIED WY Fesr © L » INFORMATION CONTAINED DATE 12-06-2008 BY 60524 UC BAW/RA/LSC~ Analysis of Sample Date analyzed - 23 October, 2001 Date of Report - 24 October, 2001 Sample___SPS02.88.01 | received the sample (in a microcentrifuge tube in a ziplock bag) from in the afternoon of. ober, 2001. The t eighed, and it was estimated to contain about lof material. In B-3. f sterile water for injection was added to the material. After thorough mixing, the material was transferred to a second tube. The original tube was disinfected with bleach, dried and weit he net weight of the granular material was determined to be Ten-fold dilutions were plated out onto TSA, then incubated overnight. Plate counts were made, and it was determined that the original tube contained ince there was[_______Jof material, this calculates to be per gram of powder material. Visual inspection of the suspension of material under phase contrast microscopy found few (<5%) visible vegetative cells, a small amount (<10%) visible debris, and very few small clumps. Most of the material appeared to be individual refractile spores. Interpretations and conclusions: If this is a preparation of bacterial spores, it is a relatively pure preparation.. This preparation did not appear as pure as the material (SPS02.57.03) previously examined on October 17, 2001. The SPS02.57.03 preparation contained spores at a concentration o' [— _]The SPS02.57.03 spores were thus approximately|___ times "hotter" or more concentrated per gram than the SPS02.88.01 spores examined here. Bruce E. Ivins, Ph.D. USAMRIID Bacteriology Division b6 b7c ba bIF b2 buUF